True enough. But if you're not paying for insurance, you're not paying into that system. It's not hard to see that as free-loading. (Note: I am NOT advocating that "free-loaders" should be denied medical care. But it does seem like it'd be preferable to not let people freeload.)
Or you could spread the risk pool to the entire population, and pay for the insurance through taxes, or compulsory insurance, or something along those lines. No bankruptcies, lower overall costs, and a hell of a lot less stress, and less incentive for people with families / conditions to stay wedded to one employer.
Absolutely, that's just what I mean. Either we should let people die/go bankrupt if they end up in medical trouble and don't have insurance and can't pay (which is obviously morally and societally undesirable and doesn't seem to make practical sense anyway) or we should ensure that everybody is part of the system. I don't really see an alternative and this seems fundamental to the US health care debate.
